DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2098 times:
Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot. The President did not show up and is in danger of not being on GA's ballot in November (he probably won't win GA anyway but still, a low blow.) I thought we heard the last of the birthers...
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2082 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter): Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot. The President did not show up and is in danger of not being on GA's ballot in November (he probably won't win GA anyway but still, a low blow.) I thought we heard the last of the birthers...
As Ron White says: Can't fix stupid.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1518 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2067 times:
And yet again the republicans find people to shoot them in the foot. They gotta knock it off if they want a chance in November.
Blue
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2042 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter): Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot. The President did not show up and is in danger of not being on GA's ballot in November (he probably won't win GA anyway but still, a low blow.) I thought we heard the last of the birthers...
Give it up birthers its getting old, and I'm betting the Supreme court will overrule anything that materializes from this. Federal law still trumps state law las I checked.
some quotes from the article.
Quote: One contended an 1875 Supreme Court opinion says only a “natural born citizen” -- someone born in the U.S. and whose parents were U.S. citizens -- can be president. (Obama’s father, who was from Kenya, was not a U.S. citizen.) The other alleged Obama’s birth, social security and passport records are forgeries.
First of all he was born in Hawaii period, how was a newspaper article showing his birth planted!! If you were born in the US in 1961 no matter the citizenship of your parents you are a natural born US citizen. Also his mother was a US citizen so no matter where he was born he would have been given US citizenship at birth as you only need one US parent. John McCain was not born in the US but there as been no issues on his attempts to run for president as his parents were US citizens.
Also where is the freaking proof that any of these documents are forged, with his passport particurlarily. Does he get a dimplomatic passport when he was in the senate like in other countries? (that document is 100% legit) Even if he had a regular US passport I'm sure a foreign country that Obama tried to enter at some point would have picked up on it and notified the US about it and denied him entry, unless of course every nation he visitied was in on the scam as well
Quote: The claims raised Thursday have been brought in courts across the country in dozens of cases, all of them dismissed.
I wonder why because it can't be proved because the documents are real I reckon. These lawyers really have no business practicing law IMO and are a discrace to the profession
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 4, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2019 times:
So I guess Romney can't be on the Georgia ballot either.
Under that definition of Natural Born Citizen - Romney's father would be a Mexican citizen even though he served as Govenor of Michigan and ran for President. Since he was born in Mexico and never applied for citizenship, that wouldn't count. Right?
These folks are giving us red-neck southerners a bad name.
mham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2557 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1975 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 3): Also his mother was a US citizen so no matter where he was born he would have been given US citizenship at birth as you only need one US parent. John McCain was not born in the US but there as been no issues on his attempts to run for president as his parents were US citizens.
Actually, there were issues with him. Some contended he was born off base in Panama, but apparently in a US hospital.
This has come up a number of times over the history of the country, sometimes overlooked, never really answered.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 6, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1960 times:
Thanks to the electoral college, this sort of crap doesn't matter. The GOP candidate was going to win the state anyway, any votes over the number required to get 50% are superfluous. And in this case, that number might be a couple thousand.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 6127 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1961 times:
Basically it appears that Georgia is seeming to argue that family trees don't fork in that state.
Maybe we should just let them go their won way, then refuse to acknowledge their Electoral College Delegates because the State violates Federal Laws.
Also, I've been contemplating the natural birth requirement. Does it really mean a vaginal birth, disqualifying c-section kids?
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 3): First of all he was born in Hawaii period, how was a newspaper article showing his birth planted!!
I'm sure that there are a lot of people who believe all conspiracy theories who will believe that "un-named foreigners" plant fake birth announcements around the country every day (and related birth recordings) so they can take over the country some day.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 3): John McCain was not born in the US but there as been no issues on his attempts to run for president as his parents were US citizens.
Old John is white with a "normal American name" so he won't be challenged. Now Old John was running around on Wife #1, just like Mr. Piggy ran around on WIfe #1 and Wife #2, but the GOP (or TP) seems to admire that quality in their candidates. Might be why Willard is in danger.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 8, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1907 times:
I'm no birther but a humorous argument against the president was that Hawaii was taken illegally and shouldn't be a state/is not a real state, so him being born in Hawaii makes him not a US citizen. Stupid, but at the same time, it's kind of an interesting thought...
Hopefully birthers in other states don't do the same thing GA is doing...
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 10, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1827 times:
Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot. The President did not show up and is in danger of not being on GA's ballot in November (he probably won't win GA anyway but still, a low blow.) I thought we heard the last of the birthers...
The "balance of the evidence" has to be in favor of the plantiff. The plaintiff has no evidence, so there is no reason for the defendant to show up.
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10022 posts, RR: 54 Reply 11, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1821 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8): a humorous argument against the president was that Hawaii was taken illegally
Hah!
Hawaii was about the only state that WAS taken legally! It's King basically said "we want to be Americans," and America said "come join the party. Bring some mai tais."
Massachusetts - stolen. Virginia - stolen. North Carolina - stolen twice. Nobody asked the residents of 48 of the states that were already there if they wanted to be part of the US. No, it was like the Borg - you will be assimilated, resistance is futile.
BN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5007 posts, RR: 55 Reply 12, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1813 times:
Well I hope the Birthers win in this state.. it would just add to their insanity.
..and then Obama, being the kind of guy he is, would go to the state anyway just to show he represents all the people.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 4): Under that definition of Natural Born Citizen - Romney's father would be a Mexican citizen even though he served as Govenor of Michigan and ran for President. Since he was born in Mexico and never applied for citizenship, that wouldn't count. Right?
These folks are giving us red-neck southerners a bad name.
That's line is funny as hell...
.. but thanks for the info on Willard, I never knew this. Better tell the Gingrich camp, they'll torpedo him with that one for once and for all.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 13, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1811 times:
.. but thanks for the info on Willard, I never knew this. Better tell the Gingrich camp, they'll torpedo him with that one for once and for all.
They already know; but it would be pretty self-destructive to use it against Romney, since Romney isn't that anti-immigrant, and nor is Gingrich. Gingrich has some almost reasonable views on immigration.
This article sums things up nicely. Gingrich actually wants amnesty for long-term illegals. Romney wants to alter policy to make life so miserable for illegals that they go home.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 14, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1802 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13): Romney wants to alter policy to make life so miserable for illegals that they go home.
Actually he recently said illegals would self-deport themselves!
Basically create conditions so they can't make a living here... for some reason I don't think that would happen...
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3212 posts, RR: 30 Reply 15, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1785 times:
Quoting D L X (Reply 11): It's King basically said "we want to be Americans," and America said "come join the party. Bring some mai tais."
Oh, I am sorry, I missed the part of the constitution where it says an unelected monarch / other type of dictator can make binding decisions on behalf of subjects it rules by force.
Quoting D L X (Reply 11): Nobody asked the residents of 48 of the states that were already there if they wanted to be part of the US
Not only that but it is illegal to even think of seceding from the parasites in Washington DC. Kind of ironic considering the amount of countries the U.S. has bombed the crap out of to assert some minority's right to self-determination when it was politically convenient (e.g., Serbia / Kosovo).
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
CASINTEREST From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2309 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1722 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 15): Oh, I am sorry, I missed the part of the constitution where it says an unelected monarch / other type of dictator can make binding decisions on behalf of subjects it rules by force.
Umm....The King of Hawaii was not under the constitution prior to becoming a state, but don't let facts stand in your way.
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 15): Not only that but it is illegal to even think of seceding from the parasites in Washington DC
Another statement not bounded in fact.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter): Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot. The President did not show up and is in danger of not being on GA's ballot in November (he probably won't win GA anyway but still, a low blow.) I thought we heard the last of the birthers...
The politcal backlash of such a move, even in Georigia is not one the GOP will entertain. There is going to be a seriers of retractions and dismissals handed down rather soon, I would imagine. That or a bunch of federal funding will be reappropriated to other states.
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3212 posts, RR: 30 Reply 17, posted (3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1716 times:
Quoting CASINTEREST (Reply 16):
Umm....The King of Hawaii was not under the constitution prior to becoming a state, but don't let facts stand in your way.
Oh, so you are saying that if tomorrow the Sauds decided Saudi Arabia should become a state of the U.S., the fact that they have no democratic legitimacy whatsoever over the country would not play into the consideration of whether to accept them in the Union or not?
PHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 6974 posts, RR: 31 Reply 18, posted (3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1716 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8): Interesting, apparently GA is holding a trial having to do with the President's birth certificate and whether he should be on the GA ballot.
Was his (Obama's) name on the GA ballot in 2008? If this was really an issue; it should have brought up then.
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3212 posts, RR: 30 Reply 19, posted (3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1690 times:
BTW - I know about what the constitution says and all, but this whole point about "natural born citizen" is just ridiculous. In my personal experience, most U.S. residents that were born overseas have a far greater respect and sense of appreciation for the U.S. than many "natural-born" U.S. citizens, as for one they still generally understand the concept of American Dream (they still see it as "having the right to fight and work for anything I want" and have not deturped it to mean "having a right to everything I want").
Obama hates the U.S. way too much to NOT having been born there.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 20, posted (3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1675 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 9): If he was born before it officially became a state there may be an argument
So that would have applied to Barry Goldwater, who was born in the Arizona Territory in 1909. The state of Arizona did not exist until Feb 1912 when it became the 48th state.
Quoting D L X (Reply 11): there if they wanted to be part of the US.
Texas asked to be able to join the United States.
Now why the union accepted them ?? Of course it was a different time and they could not imagine what the state would product.
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 5640 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1639 times:
Quoting D L X (Reply 11):
Hawaii was about the only state that WAS taken legally! It's King basically said "we want to be Americans," and America said "come join the party. Bring some mai tais."
King? Wasn't it a Queen Lili'uokalani?
This was an OK read r read. I read 2/3 of it for a book club then i gave up because iit rather opinionated and one-sided
"Starting with the toppling of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, the United States has not hesitated to overthrow governments that stood in the way of its political and economic goals. "
CASINTEREST From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2309 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1626 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 17): Oh, so you are saying that if tomorrow the Sauds decided Saudi Arabia should become a state of the U.S., the fact that they have no democratic legitimacy whatsoever over the country would not play into the consideration of whether to accept them in the Union or not?
ytou aren not consistant with your original argument or the sprit if the discussion surrounding Hawaii. But if Saudi Arabia decided they wanted to become a part of the US and adopt the US Constitution, and the US wanted Saudi Arabia , it could happen. Part of becoming part of the US is adopring the constitutiion.
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 17): Kohlhaas v. State of Alaska
Do you even read about these things? This was states issue , with absolutely ZERO implications on the Federal level which you are complaining about, but since you don't let facts stand in your way, keep going.
This was about the civil war and money and bonds written under a renegade governemnt that tried to escape the bounds of the constitution in what revisionsits call a states rights battle, and what everyone else recalls was an battle of slavery and the growing implications of aboliton.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 23, posted (3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1609 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 17): Oh, so you are saying that if tomorrow the Sauds decided Saudi Arabia should become a state of the U.S., the fact that they have no democratic legitimacy whatsoever over the country would not play into the consideration of whether to accept them in the Union or not?
Since we recognize them as the legitimate government of the people, that is correct.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10022 posts, RR: 54 Reply 24, posted (3 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1586 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 20): Quoting D L X (Reply 11):
there if they wanted to be part of the US.
Texas asked to be able to join the United States.
That's why I said 48.
Quoting mt99 (Reply 21): King? Wasn't it a Queen Lili'uokalani?
Same diff, for the purposes of this discussion.
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 15): Oh, I am sorry, I missed the part of the constitution where it says an unelected monarch / other type of dictator can make binding decisions on behalf of subjects it rules by force.
I'm sure you also missed the part of the constitution that said that it was okay to take land away from the Natives. But who's counting.
(In other words, that's the whole freaking point!)
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 25, posted (3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1594 times:
It wasn't a trial, it was a hearing before an administrative law judge. The only thing Judge Malihi is able to do, is deliver a non-binding finding of fact to the GA Secretary of State, who will then make the decision as to whether or not President Obama will be on the GA ballot or not.
I watched the hearing and Obamas counsel (the GA Democratic Party lawyer) was right not to show, it was a clown show beyond imagination. Especially once Orly Taitz got involved, as the judge had to repeatedly ask her if she was summarizing or testifying - at one point she caught on, went to the witness stand and started testifying!
The only interesting thing to come from yesterdays hearing, was watching a private investigator, Susan Daniels, and a former INS worker at JFK, both admit on the stand that they had committed a federal crime, by virtue of having abused various Social Security services to check on a variety of SSNs that allegedly belong to President Obama. There would have been three, but retired USAF man Gregory Hollister refused to show. Probably a good idea, since he abused a self-service to change the address attached to President Obamas Selective Service records to his own, and then had them mailed there.
Of course, the amusing thing is that two of the hearings admitted the Presidents birth certifiates (both the COLB and the long form) into evidence, so by virtue of that, at least two of the eligibility requirements have been proved.
Edit: I forgot, the only reason Obama was supposed to be there in the first place, was because Orly Taitz found some blank subpoena forms with Judge Malihis signature attached to them. She's been mailing them to just about everyone under the sun - and the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings has been busy removing the template form from their website. Judge Malihi never mentioned them in any of his writings, so there are those of us who are speculating if he even knew that Orly has been mailing them.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 26, posted (3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1573 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 25): Edit: I forgot, the only reason Obama was supposed to be there in the first place, was because Orly Taitz found some blank subpoena forms with Judge Malihis signature attached to them. She's been mailing them to just about everyone under the sun - and the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings has been busy removing the template form from their website. Judge Malihi never mentioned them in any of his writings, so there are those of us who are speculating if he even knew that Orly has been mailing them.
Em,
Wouldn´t this be forging of documents and a felony in it´s own right? I know that here judges would seriously frown upon somebody using forms signed by them this way and there is a prison term connected to the offense.
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 27, posted (3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1571 times:
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 26): Wouldn´t this be forging of documents and a felony in it´s own right? I know that here judges would seriously frown upon somebody using forms signed by them this way and there is a prison term connected to the offense.
Apparently it's relatively kosher when it comes to cases within GA jurisdiction. IIRC Obama was considered properly served, since the subpoena was sent to the GA Democratic Party attorney.
Of course, Orly has also been trying to use them in another case she's currently running in Hawaii. Hell, Orly even asked the judge in GA for a letter rogatory, in order to force that subpoena through, though I think the judge is currently trying to ignore her as much as possible.
One problem we anti-birthers have been having is, unlike the normal trials, where the paperwork is available through sites/services such as PACER, this hearing doesn't have that. And so we've been relying on the paperwork that the parties themselves have bothered to release.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 28, posted (3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1498 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 25): I forgot, the only reason Obama was supposed to be there in the first place, was because Orly Taitz found some blank subpoena forms with Judge Malihis signature attached to them. She's been mailing them to just about everyone under the sun
Does anyone else find it very disturbing that there are blank subpoena forms with a judge's signature attached to them? Those are basically blank checks to violate someone's rights.
If there were any justice in this world, she'd be in jail for mailing them out, and the judge would be disciplined for signing a blank subpoena.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 1639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 32, posted (3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1392 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 9): If he was born before it officially became a state there may be an argument but he was born in 1961 and Hawaii became a state in 1959.
Even then, the argument is invalid since it was a US territory and subject to US law. Ergo, he would have been born a US citizen.
Quoting D L X (Reply 11): It's King basically said "we want to be Americans," and America said "come join the party. Bring some mai tais."
Didn't Hawaii have a Queen when the monarchy was overthrown? Anyway, it was a US supported coup so by all intents and purposes, that was an illegal annexation.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 33, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1330 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 28): Does anyone else find it very disturbing that there are blank subpoena forms with a judge's signature attached to them? Those are basically blank checks to violate someone's rights.
If there were any justice in this world, she'd be in jail for mailing them out, and the judge would be disciplined for signing a blank subpoena.
A user on another forum pointed something out, which I can only agree, namely that if the judges had to sign every single subpoena, they'd be flooded with paperwork and have very little time for anything else. If it's (improperly) sent out of the state jurisdiction, a quick call by the recipient to a legal hotline would quickly reveal that it's worthless. And within the jurisdiction, if the recipient ignores it, the sender can always file a Motion to Compel and have a judge take a closer look at it.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 34, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1318 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 33): A user on another forum pointed something out, which I can only agree, namely that if the judges had to sign every single subpoena, they'd be flooded with paperwork and have very little time for anything else. If it's (improperly) sent out of the state jurisdiction, a quick call by the recipient to a legal hotline would quickly reveal that it's worthless. And within the jurisdiction, if the recipient ignores it, the sender can always file a Motion to Compel and have a judge take a closer look at it.
Understandable, but I still don't like it. That would require the recipient to know the legal ins and outs of subpoenas - when they are binding and when they aren't, if they even have the option of calling a legal hotline or ignoring it, etc. - and that's unrealistic to expect of the average citizen. Those who know least about the law would be most at risk for having their rights violated because of a subpoena that shouldn't have been sent out in the first place.
If that means you have to have a few people in a state's justice system whose sole job it is to evaluate and sign off on subpoenas, so be it. No signature should be put down requiring someone to do something unless the person signing knows what it is that's being required, and whether it's legal or not.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 35, posted (3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1317 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 34): Understandable, but I still don't like it. That would require the recipient to know the legal ins and outs of subpoenas - when they are binding and when they aren't, if they even have the option of calling a legal hotline or ignoring it, etc. - and that's unrealistic to expect of the average citizen. Those who know least about the law would be most at risk for having their rights violated because of a subpoena that shouldn't have been sent out in the first place.
I entirely agree, and my impression of it that there was an unspoken agreement amongst the GA legal community to go easy on using them.
But then Orly Taitz, quite possibly the worst lawyer in the world, showed up, squealed with excitement at the find and the endless opportunities it afforded her, and proceeded to subpoena everyone from the President, over a couple of TV stations, to one of the nuns who taught the President at a school in Indonesia. The saying 'This is why we can't have nice things' springs to mind.
bjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2311 posts, RR: 2 Reply 36, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1048 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 7): Old John is white with a "normal American name" so he won't be challenged. Now Old John was running around on Wife #1, just like Mr. Piggy ran around on WIfe #1 and Wife #2, but the GOP (or TP) seems to admire that quality in their candidates. Might be why Willard is in danger.
Except McCain needed a Senate Resolution [has no legal force] to say he was qualified to run for the Presidency. Interestingly it was co-sponsored by Øbama.
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 19): Obama hates the U.S. way too much to NOT having been born there.
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 25): Of course, the amusing thing is that two of the hearings admitted the Presidents birth certifiates (both the COLB and the long form) into evidence, so by virtue of that, at least two of the eligibility requirements have been proved.
You forgot to mention that at the hearing two document experts testified that they were forgeries.
"An idea has to be incredibly absurd to have any reasonable chance of succeeding" --A. Einstein
Below is a summary list of the physical evidence introduced in yesterday's hearing in GA.
P2. Affidavit of Senior Deportation Officer with the Department of Homeland Security John Sampson, showing that Obama is using Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425
p3. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felicito Papa, showing Obama's alleged true and correct copy of his birth certificate to be a computer generated forgery
P4. Affidavit of witness Linda Jordan, attesting to the fact, that SSN 042-68-4425, used by Obama, does not pass E-Verify
p6. Selective service certificate showing Obama using SSN 042-68-4425 and official printout from Social Security Number Verification Services, showing that 042-68-4425 was never issued to Barack Obama, attached e-mail from Colonel Gregory Hollister
p7. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felicito Papa, showing that Obama is using CT SSN 042-68-4425 on his 2009 tax returns
p9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
p10. Passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, mother of Barack Obama, showing Obama listed in her passport under the name Barack Obama Soebarkah, attached affidavit by Chris Strunk, recipient of Obama's passport records under FOIA
p11. Barack Obama's Indonesian school registration card #203, date accepted January 1, 1968, released by the Associated Press in Indonesia, showing him using last name Soetoro and listing citizenship -Indonesia....
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 5640 posts, RR: 8 Reply 38, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1013 times:
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37):
p3. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felicito Papa, showing Obama's alleged true and correct copy of his birth certificate to be a computer generated forgery
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
So the amateurs forged the WRONG birth certificate?
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 40, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 990 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 36): You forgot to mention that at the hearing two document experts testified that they were forgeries.
HAHA!
Wait, you were serious?
No, none of the people providing 'testimony' as the trial should be referred to as 'document experts' in any way, shape or form. If they were, some of them would have been able to point out that the PDF file they were all examining a) has no bearing on the validity of the actual, physical birth certificate, and b) has all the markings of having been scanned, optimised, and then saved as a PDF. See for instance http://www.thefogbow.com/special-reports/adobe-special-report/
Not to mention, it requires completely ignoring repeated confirmations from the State of Hawaii, that the birth certificates shown so far are the real deal.
Also, all the talk about Obama's SSN is most likely outdated, since President Obama has very likely had a new SSN issued. Orly Taitz has been neglecting to redact the President's SSN in her court filings for the past 2½ years, and the White House released the President's tax records for 2009 without properly redacting the SSN in there. Both of which I'd imagine would be grounds for having a new SSN issued.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p6. Selective service certificate showing Obama using SSN 042-68-4425 and official printout from Social Security Number Verification Services, showing that 042-68-4425 was never issued to Barack Obama, attached e-mail from Colonel Gregory Hollister
And Gregory Hollister had a VERY good reason for not appearing at the hearing. When he changed the address associated with President Obamas SSN to his own, he committed a felony. He probably wasn't all that keen on admitting to a felony while on the record.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
Really? The layout looks the same to me:
Of course, Birthers like to compare the Nordyke long form BC with Obamas COLB, which truly is like comparing apples and oranges.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p10. Passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, mother of Barack Obama, showing Obama listed in her passport under the name Barack Obama Soebarkah, attached affidavit by Chris Strunk, recipient of Obama's passport records under FOIA
It's worth noting that we do not have the actual passport records, what we have is the passport application submitted by Ann Dunham in 1968. The name in those records is listed as "Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah)", is found in a box labelled "Amend to Include (Exclude) Children", and has been crossed out.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p11. Barack Obama's Indonesian school registration card #203, date accepted January 1, 1968, released by the Associated Press in Indonesia, showing him using last name Soetoro and listing citizenship -Indonesia....
Under Indonesian law at the time, Obama would have been too old to have become an Indonesian citizen through the actions of his mother. And nor would he have been able to lose US citizenship through the actions of his mother. Incidently, Birthers like to conveniently ignore that in those records, Obamas birthplace is listed as being Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
sprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1673 posts, RR: 2 Reply 41, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 983 times:
With all this going on, lets say GA takes him off the ballot, it goes all the way to the supreme court. guess what is going to happen since the Chief Justice swore him in? And he was a Bush Appointee, so if there was any question, he would not have swore him in.
bjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2311 posts, RR: 2 Reply 43, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 942 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 40): Under Indonesian law at the time,
Lolo Soetoro could not have adopted him unless Barry became an Indonesian. They do not allow dual citizenship.
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 40): Of course, Birthers like to compare the Nordyke long form BC with Obamas COLB, which truly is like comparing apples and oranges.
Why would the State of Hawaii change the form of their birth documents two days apart? It's apples to apples.
Quoting sprout5199 (Reply 41): so if there was any question, he would not have swore him in.
Not true, The USSC only deals with cases before them. They do not go out looking for injustices to make right. And going by your logic how favorably do you think Chief Justice Roberts will look on Øbama after he called out the USSC at the SOTU speech last year over the Citizens United case?
"An idea has to be incredibly absurd to have any reasonable chance of succeeding" --A. Einstein
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 44, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 936 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 43): Lolo Soetoro could not have adopted him unless Barry became an Indonesian.
Which only reinforce the notion that Lolo Soetoro never adopted Obama.
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 43): Why would the State of Hawaii change the form of their birth documents two days apart? It's apples to apples.
Could you point out the difference in the layout between the two images I've posted? Other than the signatures missing at the bottom, which was a crop fail ony my part, they appear to be the same. The BC's that were compared are the present-day COLB (aka the short form) and the 1961 long form Birth Certificate.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, RR: 25 Reply 45, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 933 times:
Doesn't anyone think that the US government, with their noses in everything, would over look the President and hire a Kenyan Muslim or whatever? I think I'd believe a faked 9/11 before I'd believe that.
starbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 466 posts, RR: 4 Reply 46, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 930 times:
The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, by the Hawaiian territorial Government, as to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii.
The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, by the State of Hawaii. As such all births thereafter were issued a “Standard Certificate of Birth” by the Hawaiian State Department of Health.
The document alleged to be Obama’s Birth Certificate is a Standard “Certificate of Birth” issued by the Hawaiian State
Department of Health.
Problem is the Standard “Certificate of Birth” did not exist and therefore could not be issued prior to 1972.
“Any person to whom a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth has been issued may submit a request to amend an entry, including a legal change of name, on an existing Certificate.”
” A request to amend a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth will, however, be considered to be and treated as an application with the Department of Health for registration of a “Late Certificate of Birth” in current use
1. Because Obama was born prior to 1972 his birth would have been recorded and documented with a with Certificate of Hawaiian Birth
2. That the Standard Certificate of Birth Issued by the Hawaiian State Department of Health was only Issued to those persons born after 1972 meeting the requirements of proof as established by Hawaiian State Department of Health.
3. That even if Obama requested a change or correction of his Certificate of Hawaiian Birth pursuant State Law the
Hawaiian State Department of Health would Issue a “Late Certificate of Birth” (which is not the same as a Standard
Certificate of Birth)
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 5640 posts, RR: 8 Reply 48, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 907 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 43): Lolo Soetoro could not have adopted him unless Barry became an Indonesian. They do not allow dual citizenship.
AHH but they DO allow it. . if the child is under 18...
". The Indonesian nationality law does not recognize dual citizenship except for persons under the age of 18. After reaching 18 years of age individuals are forced to choose one citizenship."
Your turn...
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 46):
Problem is the Standard “Certificate of Birth” did not exist and therefore could not be issued prior to 1972.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37):
p9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
So Susan Nordyke birth certificate is ALSO a FAKE?
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 5640 posts, RR: 8 Reply 50, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 893 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 49): Sorry it should have been past tense under Suharto they did not allow it. Everyone had to have allegiance to Indonesia and vis a vis him.
bjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2311 posts, RR: 2 Reply 51, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 890 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 44): Which only reinforce the notion that Lolo Soetoro never adopted Obama.
Explain this....
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 37): p11. Barack Obama's Indonesian school registration card #203, date accepted January 1, 1968, released by the Associated Press in Indonesia, showing him using last name Soetoro and listing citizenship -Indonesia....
Then committing fraud at an early age......
"An idea has to be incredibly absurd to have any reasonable chance of succeeding" --A. Einstein
mt99 From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 5640 posts, RR: 8 Reply 52, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 893 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 51):
Then committing fraud at an early age......
Right its all setup. This conspiracy started in over 50 years ago.. Aliens?
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 53, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 887 times:
Quoting mt99 (Reply 50): Can you provide back up for this?
Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, Article 2 which states:
Quote: (1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child."
Not the age requirements, Barack Obama was either 5 or 6 years old when Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, and a supposed adoption would have taken place.
Again, there is no legal evidence that an adoption ever took place.
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 56, posted (3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 755 times:
I have to say, I nearly found myself rolling ont he floor laughing when I saw this sentence:
Quote: “[N]either Defendant nor his counsel, Michael Jablonski, appeared or answered. Ordinarily, the Court would enter a default order against a party that fails to participate in any stage of a proceeding. Nonetheless, despite the Defendant’s failure to appear, Plaintiffs asked this Court to decide the case on the merits of their arguments and evidence. The Court granted Plaintiffs’ request.”
Kudos to Orly Taitz & friends to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 57, posted (3 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 743 times:
Quoting CPH-R (Reply 57): I have to say, I nearly found myself rolling ont he floor laughing when I saw this sentence:
I would expect nothing less from a group of delusional psychopaths.
All these "birthers" are motivated by two things: racism and megalomania, and I believe the racism is incidental to their megalomania. They want nothing more than to be the super-sleuths that uncovers (in their mind) the greatest scandal in the history of the US. What better way to do that than to demonize a person based on a delusion that he is an anti-Christ-like figure?
Frankly, anyone who continues to aggressively pursue these matters needs to be institutionalized, and the people that support them need to snap back to reality.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 58, posted (3 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 659 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 57):
Frankly, anyone who continues to aggressively pursue these matters needs to be institutionalized, and the people that support them need to snap back to reality.
Couldn't this be considered some sort of insurrection or something?
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 59, posted (3 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 599 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 58):
Couldn't this be considered some sort of insurrection or something?
No, because they are at least going through the court system.
If you notice, I carefully and purposely put the words "continues to aggressively pursue". They had their day in court, and were sent back with their tails between their legs.
The fact is, it's irrelevant if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or the Moon. So long as his mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth, he is a natural born citizen.
The fact is, unless he or his mother renounced his citizenship, or the State Department issued a declaration that his citizenship is revoked, he will have always been a citizen, regardless of what the Indonesian, Kenyan, or Lunar authorities think.
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, RR: 4 Reply 60, posted (3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 578 times:
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 59): No, because they are at least going through the court system.
Some of them are pushing mightily close at stepping beyond that though. Once Judge Malihis ruling was announced, there was a barrage of threats on some of the Birther sites. Hell, one of the plaintiffs in this challenge was quoted as saying "We fight for our Constitution every way we can and I’m here to tell you, as I always have, this is the last peaceful means of redress at our disposal"
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 59): The fact is, it's irrelevant if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, Indonesia, or the Moon. So long as his mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth, he is a natural born citizen.
Not quite correct (as I'm reading it anyway). In 1961, in order to confer US citizenship to a child at birth, you had to have resided in the US for a number of years, including at least 5 years after your 14th birthday. Since Ann Dunham gave birth 3 months short of her 19th birthday, she could not have conferred citizenship to Obama. Obama is a US natural born citizen by virtue of Jus soli, as opposed to Jus sanguinis.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1625 posts, RR: 9 Reply 61, posted (3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 589 times:
I'm American but sometimes I'm very sick of Americans.
That Obama is a non-white person has to do with this in its entirety. If Obama was not 'Obama' and brown-skinned there would not be any bemusement about his birth certificate. Yes SOME (many) Americans are just that prejudiced.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 62, posted (3 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 501 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 61): That Obama is a non-white person has to do with this in its entirety. If Obama was not 'Obama' and brown-skinned there would not be any bemusement about his birth certificate. Yes SOME (many) Americans are just that prejudiced.
I agree. People say it's about racism and they're wrong. Nobody ever brought up a Birther complaint against Herman Cain.
This is about prejudice and idiocy, certainly. But it's about his last name and also his political affiliation.
srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16221 posts, RR: 57 Reply 63, posted (3 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 495 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
At this point, the discussion has veered off of the initial topic, and since a judge has ruled that President Obama is eligible to be on the ballot, this thread is closed.
Any posts that appear after this locking message will be deleted for housekeeping purposes.
Hello Airplanes? Yeah, it's Blimps. You win, bye....
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 2697 posts, 
From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3212 posts, 
, 5640 posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5581 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 1639 posts, 
From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2311 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 3001 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
